Was Mike Tyson invincible in his prime?

Imagine if 20 year old Mike Tyson didn't lose Cus D'amato

Didn't party

Continually was guided by Cus after he became champ?


Mike was always doomed to failure...

 

No such thing as invincible.

As for fighters who never lost, or only lost past their primes, well timing and luck played a part in that.

Would Rocky Marciano be undefeated if he had been born twenty years later? The decisions over Ted Lowry and Roland LaStarza are said to be controversial. Ricardo Lopez faced mediocre opposition. Joe Calzaghe would not likely be undefeated if he had been born 20 years earlier and had to go through that murderers row at 175 (where he'd be fighting under same day weigh-ins).

And the best LHW of that era, Michael Spinks (he caught the tail end of that golden era), well he had 27 fights at light-heavyweight and went undefeated. If he, and many undefeated fighters like him, were in an era where they fought 15-20 times per year, well they are bound to have an off-night or meet a terrible style matchup.

That's pretty much how I feel about the ATG H2H fighters (Duran at 135, Spinks at 175, Hagler/Monzon at 160, Foster at 175, Holmes at HW, Ali at HW, Mayweather/Arguello at 130, Chavez at 135, R. Jones at 168. None of these guys lost in their primes in these divisions (Duran-Dejesus 1 was over-the-lightweight-limit), but everyone is beatable. Some fighters are just fortunate to be in an era where they can financially afford to fight twice a year and be wealthy. Sometimes with the benefit of an HBO contract which lets them face overmatched opponents.

You fight all the time, you're likely to lose some.

 

I've always maintained that Tyson is both the most overrated fighter (by many people in the general public) and underrated by others who downplay his achievements and exaggerate his weaknesses and the relative averageness of his opposition.

This thread is yet another example

 

young kids disparaging great champions.

 

"How dare they challenge me with their primitive skills!"

 

No one can be invincible. The tillis fight showed that he had things to work on.

When he was determined to be the best fighter in the world, committed to the training and hard work involved, disciplined where he researched and worked on his opponents rather than just turn up to a game with plan A being to destroy and nothing else. He was a very hard man to beat

 

No, Tyson looked invincible, but no boxer is invincible..............

 

No it was not, however there is only a handful of heavyweights in history that could have handled Iron Mike ib his prime. Ali definately, Prime Holmes, Jack Johnson and maybe the Klitchs and possibly Lewis. Not sure about Joe Louis think his size and lack of movement may go against him.

 

He was obviously better prepared and more focused with Rooney, but he would have always struggled with Lennox, Vitali and Bowe....IMO.

 

Tyson lost to a fat diabetic Buster Douglas when he was a prime 25 year old fighting man. After his prison years for **** he kicked an old man in the testicles due to a minor traffic accident. He also beat up a few parking lot attendants and some hotel staff. He was a total hood rat skumbag that has no business being mentioned alongside true heavyweight greats like Ali, Lennox Lewis or Wlad Klitschko. A man's content of character must be taken into consideration when evaluating one's greatness as a sportsman.

 

And even thats overstating it. There were so many rumors at the time that he was doing crack and cocaine in Jamaica on a vacation. Then there was the infamous fat picture of him months before the fight ( I know this isnt that fat but it was all over the news that he wasnt even close to game shape).

(seen here) http://www.suprmchaos.com/mike-tyson-010102.jpg

I still have Lewis beating him in his prime but it would have been a very possible W for Tyson if he landed a few solid shots.

'

 

People underestimate how devestated Mike was when he was going through a divorce and lost Rooney. Its like that friend that is in severe depression over a break up. You cant fault him for losing at that point.

 

you just have to watch the douglas fight to see Tyson wasn't the same man at all, he was trying to walk douglas down whilst absorbing punishment.

Tyson never just walked people down, not until his career was over, fact is if he had been trying to walk down opponents then he would never have come close to winning a world title - he was way to small to do that.

 

Tyson still had some weaknesses in his prime. He was very vulnerable to clinches where boxers would tie him up. Evander holyfield exploited this beautifully but after Rooney Tysons footwork, foot placement had suffered badly and he just fought in natural talent and ability.

If you watch the holyfield fights you can clearly see holyfield predicting every tactic, right hand, half left Jab Tyson was throwing and he continously tied him up on the inside knowing full well that Tyson wouldn't have enough leverage in his punches. Mind you at this time period Tyson still had some natural speed in his punches. It was just a beautiful piece of boxing, research and strategy by Evander and a complete inability by Tyson to make fast on the spot adjustments.

Also had Tyson had a much more professional corner where he received really good professional advice, fingers crossed regarding what difference it would have made.

 

So invincible he couldn't stop a glass chinned BUM named James Smith, a bum who still managed to rock him with the only notable punch he landed in the entire 12 rounds.

So invincible he got KTFOED by another bum when he was something like 25 years old. Oh, but i almost forgot, he was ALREADY shot by that time, according to some ******s Tyson's prime lasted from his 17 to his 19.